Life cycle impacts of concentrated solar power generation on land resources and soil carbon losses in the United States

被引:3
|
作者
Rangarajan, Shreya [1 ]
Hernandez, Rebecca R. [2 ,3 ]
Jordaan, Sarah M. [1 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Adv Int Studies, Washington, DC 21218 USA
[2] Univ Calif Davis, Dept Land & Air & Water Resources, Davis, CA USA
[3] Univ Calif Davis, Wild Energy Ctr, Davis, CA USA
[4] Johns Hopkins Univ, Environm Hlth & Engn, Baltimore, MD 21218 USA
[5] McGill Univ, Dept Civil Engn, Montreal, PQ, Canada
来源
FRONTIERS IN SUSTAINABILITY | 2022年 / 3卷
关键词
concentrated solar power (CSP); life cycle assessment; land-use and land-cover change (LULCC); soil carbon; ecosystem services; GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; MOJAVE-DESERT; WARM DESERTS; ENERGY;
D O I
10.3389/frsus.2022.1021971
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Endpoint impacts related to the transformation of land-including that related to energy infrastructure-have yet to be fully quantified and understood in life cycle assessment (LCA). Concentrated solar power (CSP) which generates electricity by using mirrors to concentrate incoming shortwave radiation onto a receiver, may serve as an alternate source of reliable baseload power in the coming years. As of 2019 (baseline year of the study), the United States (U.S.) had 1.7 GW of installed capacity across a total of eight CSP sites. In this study, we (1) develop an empirical, spatially explicit methodology to categorize physical elements embodied in energy infrastructure using a LCA approach and manual image annotation, (2) use this categorization scheme to quantify land- and ecosystem service-related endpoint impacts, notably potential losses in soil carbon, owing to energy infrastructure development and as a function of electricity generated (i.e., megawatt-hour, MWh); and (3) validate and apply this method to CSP power plants within the U.S. In the Western U.S., CSP projects are sited in Arizona, California, and Nevada. Project infrastructure can be disaggregated into the following physical elements: mirrors ("heliostats"), generators, internal roads, external roads, substations, and water bodies. Of these elements, results reveal that mirrors are the most land intensive element of CSP infrastructure (>90%). Median land transformation and capacity-based land-use efficiency are 0.4 (range of 0.3-6.8) m(2)/MWh and 40 (range of 11-48) W/m(2), respectively. Soil grading and other site preparation disturbances may result in the release of both organic and inorganic carbon-the latter representing the majority stocks in deeper caliche layers-thus leading to potentially significant losses of stored carbon. We estimate three scenarios of soil carbon loss into the atmosphere across 30 years, based on land transformation in m(2) per megawatt-hour (m(2)/MWh) and carbon stock in kilograms of carbon per megawatt-hour (kg C/MWh). Results reveal that potential belowground CO2 released may range from 7 to 137% of total life cycle CO2 emissions. While this study takes a simplistic approach to estimating loss of carbon, the broad methodology provides a valuable baseline for improving comparative analyses of land-related endpoint impacts across energy technologies and other product systems.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Life cycle analysis of geothermal power generation with supercritical carbon dioxide
    Frank, Edward D.
    Sullivan, John L.
    Wang, Michael Q.
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2012, 7 (03):
  • [22] The Life Cycle Cost Analysis of a Solar Stirling Dish Power Generation System
    Krishnaiah, T.
    Rao, S. Srinivasa
    Madhumurthy, K.
    ENERGY SOURCES PART B-ECONOMICS PLANNING AND POLICY, 2012, 7 (02) : 131 - 139
  • [23] Saline microalgae cultivation for the coproduction of biofuel and protein in the United States: an integrated assessment of costs, carbon, water, and land impacts
    Zhang, Jingyi
    Zhu, Yunhua
    Hawkins, Troy R.
    Klein, Bruno C.
    Coleman, Andre M.
    Singh, Udayan
    Davis, Ryan
    Ou, Longwen
    Xu, Yiling
    Kar, Saurajyoti
    Wiatrowski, Matthew
    Gao, Song
    Valdez, Peter
    SUSTAINABLE ENERGY & FUELS, 2025, 9 (07): : 1859 - 1870
  • [24] Life cycle and cost assessment of mineral carbonation for carbon capture and storage in European power generation
    Giannoulakis, Stylianos
    Volkart, Kathrin
    Bauer, Christian
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2014, 21 : 140 - 157
  • [25] A comparative study on the combination of life cycle assessment and ecological footprints: solar photovoltaic power generation vs. coal power generation in Ningxia
    Luo, Jinni
    Yang, Hexu
    Zhang, Liangxia
    Liu, He
    Wang, Yidan
    Hao, Chen
    FRONTIERS IN ENERGY RESEARCH, 2024, 12
  • [26] Dynamic life cycle carbon and energy analysis for cross-laminated timber in the Southeastern United States
    Lan, Kai
    Kelley, Stephen S.
    Nepal, Prakash
    Yao, Yuan
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2020, 15 (12):
  • [27] Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems
    Stanley, Paige L.
    Rowntree, Jason E.
    Beede, David K.
    DeLonge, Marcia S.
    Hamm, Michael W.
    AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS, 2018, 162 : 249 - 258
  • [28] Regionalized Life-Cycle Water Impacts of Microalgal-Based Biofuels in the United States
    Quiroz, David
    Greene, Jonah M.
    Quinn, Jason C.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2022, 56 (22) : 16400 - 16409
  • [29] Life cycle assessment of carbon capture and storage in power generation and industry in Europe
    Volkart, Kathrin
    Bauer, Christian
    Boulet, Celine
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2013, 16 : 91 - 106
  • [30] The life cycle assessment of energy and carbon emissions on wool and nylon carpets in the United States
    Sim, Jaehun
    Prabhu, Vittaldas
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2018, 170 : 1231 - 1243